West Virginia Democrat. [volume] (Charles Town, W. Va.) 1885-1890, 1887-02-04

the single proposition that being the
nominee Of a fragmentary) caucus
he is entitled to every Democratic
vote. The moment the caucns adj
! iourned his election was placed on
the ground that he was its nominee
and thereupon the press, the pha-
lanx of Federal office holders, allthe
railroad politicians and Mr.. Cam
denis business partners at once com
bined together to fill the air with a
loud cry that it was rank treason to
resist its authority. Butloud asthls
cry has been, yet no one pretends
that caucus is binding upon those
who are not in it. There were many
persons vitality interested to manu-
facture public opinion in favor OF
the supremacy of the caucus, while
no one was specially concerned to
preach the truth or to inculcate
sound views, and under such cir
cumstances it is not surprising that
many intelligent men, who have not
reflected on the situation and who
arc not acquainted with the facts,
do not at this time, sufficiently APP
preciate the debt of gratitude that
is due TO the IL gentlemen who have
had the manhood to resist the false
doctrine which is now promulgated
in order that monopoly may retain
its ascendency in the Senate.
This contest for Senator has pre-
sented a question which it were
we'll for the people Of this State to
consider thoughtfully- 1t is this:
the result of the caucus was prede-
termined. If these II gentlemen
had gone into that caucus they would
have been bound to support its nom
inee. What was their duty? Should
they remain free to give their con
stituents the full benefit of their
best judgment in the selection of 4
Senator, or should they subordinate
the welfare of the State to the su.
premacy of u continuance which is
the invention of politicians and
which is used to thwartthe popular
Judgment? 1t was their duty to re-
main free. They were appointed to
represent the wishes Of their con-
stituents: acting, not for themselves
but, for the people at home, they had
no right to tie their hands so they
must go contrary to the public in
terest. The issue was.
CAUCUS AND CAMDEN OR NO CAUCUS
AND NO CAMDEN.
If this issue were left to the rank
and the file it would go against the
politicians by very large majority.
Ia my opinion, when it comes to a
question between the supremacy Of
the popular win and the supremacy
a caucus, the latter must fall. 1t is
significant fact that the politicians
and newspapers that declaim SO
loudly about the Importance Of pre-
serving the instruments of party
discipline have never yet, during all
this controversy, said single word
about maintaining the principles
professcd by the party. 1t is a re-
markable fact that although the
newspapers and politicians are so
boistrous in behalf of the caucus
vet never meet q citizen of the
uon-oiiice seeking class who does
not tell me that he cares nothing
for the caucus or for any other in
strument of party machinery. He
invariably says,-"GIyE US cANDI-
DATES WHO STAND OUT so WE CAN SEE
THEM AND WHO WILL CARRY OUT IN
GOOD FAITH THE PRINCIPLES OF De
MoCRACY AND THERE WILL BE NO NEED
FOR SUCH A CONTINUANCE AS THE eau
GUS"
1t has been evident for more than n
week that Mr.. Camden cannot be
reelected and there has been con-
siderable conference between his
friends and the gentlemen whose
sense of their duty to the welfare
of this State prevented them from
going into the caucus. This con-
ference eliminated to-day in a prop
osition that Mr.. Camden should
withdraw from the field and that .
list be made of some 10 prominent
and well-known democrats either
one of whom would unite the party
and either one of whom will be
cheerfully supported by those who
are unable to vote for Mr.. Camden.
This is very fair proposition, and